I felt indulged to start this thread just in awe of Djokovic's playing abilities. I think Djokovic is the only complete player ever (his volleying is not a liability) and even if he doesn't manage to win 17+ slams . . . surely he should have a place among the tennis greats ?Given the fact that he is in an era where grandslams are shared might affect his legacy because people always seem to remember grandslams count but his playing skills and abilities should be top 5 of all time even if I haven't seen them all.

So which position will Djokovic fall in your list when considering skills and abilities combined ??

I don't know about the ULTIMATE complete player.. His volleys are better every year, and I expect to see Djokovic do better in the future volley-concerned, but as of right now he doesn't seem to be a natural volleyer and you can see quite a few "easy" volleys missed by Djokovic...

Apart from that, he has turned into a great tennis player and I think he will have a place between the greatest... Although it is too soon to call it...

his volleying is fine and improved a lot. I'm glad you brought this up btw. He is already in top 12 of all time if I remember correctly. There is a list on MTF. He is certainly in a position to win many more slams, but time will tell. Nole is a guaranteed HOF member etc

I think Djokovic has some develop to go to be come a complete player. He needs to improve his overhead smash and needs to improve his movement too; sometime he is out of position after his returns. He does have a nice serve and an okay return of serve. But that not going to cut it when you up agains a 3.5-4.0 player in the big leagues!

I think Djokovic has some develop to go to be come a complete player. He needs to improve his overhead smash and needs to improve his movement too; sometime he is out of position after his returns. He does have a nice serve and an okay return of serve. But that not going to cut it when you up agains a 3.5-4.0 player in the big leagues!

He needs get some 3.5-4.0 drills and work on his game.

now, I'm not sure if you are serious or not. Babs and Scott/Dallas (in mixed doubles), I heard, have 'an OK return of serve' and they need to work on their game man, you are killing me

He is an incredible player, no doubt, but saying he is the ultimate complete player is going a little far. His overhead smash has a weird form and he misses them more than any No. 1 player should, and his second serve can be pretty shaky at times. And with people like Murray, Federer, and Nadal (all of them are also without any notable weaknesses) out there, saying anyone is the ultimate complete player is just impossible.

I think Djokovic's position in the all time greats is all but guaranteed if he keeps going at this pace. As far as the most complete player, it depends on how you look at it. He has the least weaknesses perhaps but if you pick apart his game piece by piece, no aspect of it is anywhere close to best ever apart from his return game. But overall when you put it together it's definitely a fierce package, he's blending the lines of offense/defense even more than Federer did. In the end it's the overall game that counts so yeah, he's definitely getting there. As far as slams go he's going to get there sooner or later, 10 slams is easily on the horizon.

He is dedicated and he has many more slams in him, but even if he decides to retire today his 'greatness' in tennis history is guaranteed. He already has better results/career than Boris Becker. One more major and he is even with JMac. one more and he is there with Lendl, Agassi and Wilander.

The biggest thing is that he was able to break Fed/Nadal duopoly and start his 'own era'. HIs future looks very bright. .

He also has his own humanitarian foundation dedicated to kids education that raised millions of dollars

He is dedicated and he has many more slams in him, but even if he decides to retire today his 'greatness' in tennis history is guaranteed. He already has better results/career than Boris Becker. One more major and he is even with JMac. one more and he is there with Lendl, Agassi and Wilander.

The biggest thing is that he was able to break Fed/Nadal duopoly and start his 'own era'. HIs future looks very bright. .

Wilander has seven like McEnroe, not eight like Lendl/Agassi.

I wouldn't rate people only by slam wins, btw. Lendl is miles ahead of Agassi. 270 weeks/4 years as #1 compared to 109 weeks/1 year. 95 tournament wins (22 masters-equivalents) versus 60 (17). Five WTFs compared to one. 19 slam finals compared to 15. No contest really. Djokovic is not going to catch Lendl simply by winning two more slams. But there's no rush, he's ahead of where Lendl was at 25.

He is dedicated and he has many more slams in him, but even if he decides to retire today his 'greatness' in tennis history is guaranteed. He already has better results/career than Boris Becker. One more major and he is even with JMac. one more and he is there with Lendl, Agassi and Wilander.

The biggest thing is that he was able to break Fed/Nadal duopoly and start his 'own era'. HIs future looks very bright. .

Wilander has seven like McEnroe, not eight like Lendl/Agassi.

I wouldn't rate people only by slam wins, btw. Lendl is miles ahead of Agassi. 270 weeks/4 years as #1 compared to 109 weeks/1 year. 95 tournament wins (22 masters-equivalents) versus 60 (17). Five WTFs compared to one. 19 slam finals compared to 15. No contest really. Djokovic is not going to catch Lendl simply by winning two more slams. But there's no rush, he's ahead of where Lendl was at 25.

Lendl is still ahead of Djokovic and about even with Nadal, Laver and Sampras group.Slams and years at #1 is the main criteria.

Djokovic has just come into his own and should move up very well in the upcoming years.

He is dedicated and he has many more slams in him, but even if he decides to retire today his 'greatness' in tennis history is guaranteed. He already has better results/career than Boris Becker. One more major and he is even with JMac. one more and he is there with Lendl, Agassi and Wilander.

The biggest thing is that he was able to break Fed/Nadal duopoly and start his 'own era'. HIs future looks very bright. .

Wilander has seven like McEnroe, not eight like Lendl/Agassi.

I wouldn't rate people only by slam wins, btw. Lendl is miles ahead of Agassi. 270 weeks/4 years as #1 compared to 109 weeks/1 year. 95 tournament wins (22 masters-equivalents) versus 60 (17). Five WTFs compared to one. 19 slam finals compared to 15. No contest really. Djokovic is not going to catch Lendl simply by winning two more slams. But there's no rush, he's ahead of where Lendl was at 25.

Litotes, yeah I messed up my numbers. Wilander won 7 slams indeed, not 8. the thing is, no matter how you look at it, people/experts/fans look at slams only plus how long you stay at #1. you are right that there's no rush for Nole. If Djokovic wins 3 more slams including RG he'll be ahead of Lendl in my book.

Djokovic's place is assured by his slam count. I find the 'all round game' point a bit of a red herring in this context, it's 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' logic. Guys win more slams win them because they can do more stuff really well, have an all round game, if we want to put it that way.

But lets imagine a scenario in which a player wins multiple slams-lets say 6, but does so because of a massive serve and booming backhand, his forehand is s**t, he dies if he goes to the net, his movement isn't great, he's always injured and he's known for being a choker. Yet he wins 6 slams. Lets compare this hypothetical player with Djoko, they have comparable weeks at no and about the same no of tournaments etc. Why should our estimation of those players be swayed by Djoko's all round game verses our hypothetical player, lets call him 'Sid's, abilities? They achieve more or less the same, but they simply had different approaches. The more negative you are about Sids shortcomings, the more positive you must be about his assets, since that given his weaknesses his strengths must be all the more phenomenal. It seems to me that Sid and Djoko are on par, they're both great because of what the achieved, not how aesthetically pleasing or otherwise, how sexy or otherwise, how tenacious or otherwise, or a million other things.

Logged

I am a lighthouse worn by the weather and the wavesAnd though I'm empty I still warn the sailors on their way

Novak has to just keep doing what he's doing first. Anything can happen. Who would have thought that Nadal would be out almost a year? So let's just wait to see how Novak's career progresses before we out him up there above all those retired greats.